One thing that doesn't sit well with me is when people throw out wild comments under the guise of scientific fact. Especially when its from someone who has worked in the seismology field for a number of years as it makes it all that more believable for the average person that doesn't know any better.

I myself, as far as this board is concerned, am of the position that this is a place to learn how to better formulate your predictions and to learn from your mistakes. Its a good place to get started and not a place where the final analysis will be made as to whether or not a persons methodology is viable.

As to whether one catalog is better then another one, I wonder how many events from the NOA catalog make it over to the Bulletin of the Internation Seismological Centre (ISC), which is produced about two years after the earthquakes occur, which is the "final" computation of hypocenters for the world.

My continued use of the PDE in my analysis showed that more events were being recorded as M4+ then on the NOA. I also continued with the PDE as no search was available on the NOA catalog. At any rate, using the PDE gave a greater chance of making the good doctors statements valid.

Dennis